Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was legally required to endorse the institutionalized oppression of African Americans by our police when I had to pay a speeding ticket 3 years ago. In fact, the officer was black and I'm white. What's the statute of limitations on filing charges for racial profiling !?
Surely you aren't denying that we have a history of sordid behavior by many cops in this country against African-Americans that has no parallel in terms of the treatment we Caucasians have generally received?
And that African-Americans are often profiled simply based on their race?
We had open immigration prior to the Chinese Exclusion Act of the 1880s and the implementation of a qouta system in the 1920s.
Are white Christians better than other Christians..or adherents of other faiths or of no religion at all.
And, yes, at times it was very theocratic...especially if we are going back to 1607.
Early colonial America was not theocratic?
A lot of other things were different then. We didn't have citizenship or naturalization for those who were not white either for almost all that time period, or rail and plane travel, or welfare etc. No I wouldn't say even colonial America was generally theocratical with a few exception in time and place, especially compared to other cultures. What I'm saying is America was ~85% white most of the remainder black and about 90% nominally Christian for most all of its history up through 1960.
So are liberals. For instance they don't understand X and y chromosomes and genetic recombination, or heredity.
Actually liberals often tend to be very scientifically literate. What do we not comprehend about heredity or x and y chromosomes? Or genetic recombination?
It is conservatives who have tremendous difficulty accepting the social implications of new scientific advances.
Heck, I am one hour north of an extremely popular museum that actually argues that dinosaurs coexisted with humans, the world is only six thousand years old, you get the idea.
It isn't liberals who are driving it's popularity.
A lot of other things were different then. We didn't have citizenship or naturalization for those who were not white either for almost all that time period, or rail and plane travel, or welfare etc. No I wouldn't say even colonial America was generally theocratical with a few exception in time and place, especially compared to other cultures. What I'm saying is America was ~85% white most of the remainder black and about 90% nominally Christian for most all of its history up through 1960.
If you dont think colonial America was theocratic except for a few exceptions here and there...
should we do away with citizenship or naturalization for non-whites?
I am confused...are you calling for a return to that?
Actually liberals often tend to be very scientifically literate. What do we not comprehend about heredity or x and y chromosomes? Or genetic recombination?
It is conservatives who have tremendous difficulty accepting the social implications of new scientific advances.
Heck, I am one hour north of an extremely popular museum that actually argues that dinosaurs coexisted with humans, the world is only six thousand years old, you get the idea.
It isn't liberals who are driving it's popularity.
Well whatever. Liberals believe in politically correct science only that fits their sociopolitical agendas.
Well whatever. Liberals believe in politically correct science only that fits their sociopolitical agendas.
You serious? Just off the topic of my head I can think of numerous concepts that are considered settled in the scientific community that are denied by conservatives because they contradict a literal reading of the Bible. And yes, liberals as well as anybody who is scientifically literate reject right-wing junk "science."
If you dont think colonial America was theocratic except for a few exceptions here and there...
should we do away with citizenship or naturalization for non-whites?
I am confused...are you calling for a return to that?
Are you calling for a return to open borders you claim we had before the 1870s? See two can play the strawman argument game.
While I think some groups are more deserving than others, at least you are consistent and I can't argue against that much.
Why would anyone who claims to be for "limited government" want ANYONE to receive government benefits of ANY kind? You know who pays for those benefits? The taxpayer--also known as Income Theft Victim.
Well whatever. Liberals believe in politically correct science only that fits their sociopolitical agendas.
Your party, at least back in 2013, were literally mostly science denying cultists:
In 2009, 54% of Republicans and 64% of Democrats said humans have evolved over time, a difference of 10 percentage points. Today, 43% of Republicans and 67% of Democrats say humans have evolved, a 24-point gap. //www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=53006666
Also, at least between 2009 and 2013 (the date of the above survey) the democrats percentage of science-denying cultists was reducing, but the republican percentage of science denying cultists was multiplying like fungi on a rotten apple.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
